Claude Opus 4.7

anthropic/claude-4.7-opus-20260416

Claude Opus 4.7 is an Anthropic model that accepts text, image, and file inputs and generates text output. It supports tools and reasoning, handles a context length of 1,000,000 tokens, is not open‑source, and was released on 2026‑04‑16 with input pricing of $5 per M tokens and output pricing of $25 per M tokens.

  • tool use
  • structured outputs
  • reasoning

At a glance

provideranthropic
releasedAug 26, 2025
context1M
input / M$5

Specifications

What the API gives you

Context window
1M tokens
Max output
128K tokens
Input price
$5 / 1M tokens
Output price
$25 / 1M tokens
Cache read
$0.50 / 1M tokens
Modalities
text, image, file → text
Knowledge cutoff
—
Released
Aug 26, 2025

Measured evidence

Public benchmark record

FACTS Grounding
61.7%2026-10-21
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (Epoch AI)‡
70.2% ± 2.72026-06-10max effort, evaluated 2026-06-10
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
86.4% ± 2.42026-08-06max effort, evaluated 2026-08-06
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI)‡
90.2% ± 1.82026-04-17xhigh effort, evaluated 2026-04-17
LiveBench Agentic Coding
50.7%2026-10-18
LiveBench Coding
82.1%2026-10-18
LiveBench Data Analysis
78.3%2026-10-18
LiveBench Instruction Following
66.7%2026-10-18
LiveBench Language
77.9%2026-10-18
LiveBench Math
92.8%2026-10-18
LiveBench Reasoning
87.2%2026-10-18
LMArena Creative Writing‡
1486 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Instruction Following‡
1498 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Long Query‡
1505 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Math‡
1498 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Search Factuality
1210 Elo2026-10-13
LMArena Text‡
1501 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Text Factuality‡
1477 Elo2026-10-20high effort
LMArena Vision‡
1298 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena Vision Diagrams‡
1333 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena Vision OCR‡
1311 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena WebDev‡
1558 Elo2026-10-19high effort
LMArena WebDev Image-to-Web‡
1577 Elo2026-10-19high effort
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
86.7% ± 5.12026-08-06max effort, evaluated 2026-08-06
OTIS Mock AIME (Epoch AI)‡
97.8% ± 2.22026-04-17xhigh effort, evaluated 2026-04-17
SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI)‡
51.7% ± 1.62026-08-27xhigh effort, evaluated 2026-08-27
tau2-bench (1.0.1)‡
40.2%2026-07-23max effort, evaluated 2026-07-23

LMArena data licensed CC-BY-4.0. Aider (Apache-2.0) and SWE-bench (MIT) are open. Design Arena uses blind human preference. ‡ Submitted scaffold plus model result. Compare the harness and effort settings, not only the model name.

Task evidence

How broad is the support?

Each status is exact to this model version and the selected task. Official release claims remain provisional.

  • Best LLM for Competition MathEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 4 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Business WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Logic & Problem SolvingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Marketing CopyEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Chat & RoleplayEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Creative WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Show all 40 tasks
  • Best LLM for WritingEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Roleplay & CharacterEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Math & ReasoningEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 5 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for a General AssistantEstablished evidence

    100% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document SummarizationEstablished evidence

    85% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for SummarizationEstablished evidence

    85% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Grounded RAGEstablished evidence

    81% of intended weighted task evidence across 3 independent sources. 5 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Code CompletionEstablished evidence

    79% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for RAG & Long ContextEstablished evidence

    72% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Open-Weight LLM for Self-HostingEstablished evidence

    64% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Image UnderstandingEstablished evidence

    61% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Fast SummariesEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Value LLMEstablished evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Literary TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Everyday TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for TranslationEstablished evidence

    50% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Local LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 4 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Frontend & UIEstablished evidence

    45% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best Cheap LLM for High VolumeEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Cheapest Capable LLMEstablished evidence

    40% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for CodingEstablished evidence

    38% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for JSON & Schema OutputEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Structured Data ExtractionEstablished evidence

    35% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 3 of 4 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Debugging & Code ReviewEstablished evidence

    33% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 5 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Tool & Function CallingEstablished evidence

    29% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 6 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for AI AgentsEstablished evidence

    18% of intended weighted task evidence across 2 independent sources. 9 of 9 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for OCR & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    65% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Charts & DiagramsProvisional evidence

    65% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Vision & DocumentsProvisional evidence

    60% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 4 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Document ParsingProvisional evidence

    58% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Structured-output eval or VLMEvalKit tasks. 3 of 5 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Massive ContextProvisional evidence

    47% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LongBench v2. 2 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for High-Volume ExtractionProvisional evidence

    21% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Route reliability or Structured-output eval. 1 of 3 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Agentic CodingProvisional evidence

    16% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from Design Arena Full-stack or Design Arena Web-apps. 7 of 7 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

  • Best LLM for Autonomous AgentsProvisional evidence

    13% of intended weighted task evidence across 1 independent source; broader independent confirmation is still missing from LMArena Agent or LMArena Agent Task Outcome. 6 of 6 configured evaluation feeds currently have results.

Recommendation coverage

Where this model appears

Not currently included in a published recommendation. The task evidence panel above says exactly what is confirmed and what is still missing.

Catalog data via OpenRouter and models.dev. Last checked within the past 6 hours.